The partial government shutdown, now in its 31st day, could force the closure of some smaller airports across the country if security staffing shortages continue to worsen.
Acting Deputy TSA Administrator Adam Stahl said Tuesday that rising officer absences may leave no choice but to shut down certain airports, while House Speaker Mike Johnson warned that airports "are reaching a breaking point." Roughly 50,000 TSA security officers have been working without pay for the past month after Department of Homeland Security funding lapsed on February 13, when Congress failed to reach a deal on immigration enforcement reforms demanded by Democrats.
According to CNBC, the warning comes as spring break travel is in full swing, with an estimated 171 million passengers expected to fly during the spring travel period — up 4% from the same two-month window last year. Travelers have at times endured security lines lasting two hours or longer. The situation has drawn sharp criticism from airline industry leaders and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.
The issue has sparked debate over whether the federal government's inability to resolve a funding impasse is creating unnecessary risk for the traveling public. Critics contend that Washington's dysfunction is being borne disproportionately by workers and passengers who have no say in the matter, while the political class trades blame across the aisle.
Stahl told Fox News's "Fox and Friends" on Tuesday: "As the weeks continue, if this continues, it's not hyperbole to suggest that we may have to quite literally shut down airports — particularly smaller ones if callout rates go up." The statement marked one of the most direct warnings yet from a senior administration official about the tangible consequences of the prolonged standoff.
According to DHS, the typical rate at which TSA workers call in sick or fail to report for duty is under 2%. On Sunday, however, 10% of officers failed to show up for duty — a fivefold increase from normal. The deterioration has been far worse at specific locations.
Since February 14 — when funding expired — absences at Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson, New York's JFK, and Houston have hovered around 20%. On Sunday and Monday, the numbers spiked dramatically: over 50% in Houston and more than 30% in New Orleans and Atlanta. DHS also reported that 366 TSA officers have left the agency entirely during the shutdown.
CEOs of the nation's largest airlines issued a pointed statement: "Once again, air travel is the political football amid another government shutdown." The unnamed executives did not mince words about the impact on their operations. Their frustration reflects the broader sentiment across the industry that essential services should not be held hostage to legislative gridlock.
On Thursday, senators from both parties failed in competing efforts to fund the TSA. That failure left no clear path forward and added to the sense that resolution remains weeks — not days — away. For free-market advocates, the entire episode underscores a core critique: when the government monopolizes a service like airport security, political dysfunction becomes an operational crisis.
This is not the first time a funding lapse has disrupted air travel. Last fall, a 43-day government shutdown led to widespread flight disruptions, prompting the FAA to order a 10% flight cut at major airports. The current situation appears to be heading in a similar direction if absences continue to climb.
Milton Friedman once observed that nobody spends somebody else's money as carefully as their own. The TSA's predicament is a textbook illustration. A workforce of 50,000 people deemed essential to national security is being forced to work without compensation, and the predictable result — declining morale, rising absences, and departures — is exactly what any economist would forecast. Private-sector airlines and airports have little control over a workforce they don't employ. Yet they absorb the operational fallout through delayed flights, frustrated customers, and reputational damage. The arrangement practically guarantees that every congressional impasse becomes an aviation crisis.
For travelers, the practical implications are straightforward. Expect longer lines, potential disruptions at smaller regional airports, and the possibility of flight reductions if conditions mirror last fall's shutdown. Those with flexible schedules may want to build extra buffer time into travel plans or consider whether trips can be rescheduled.
The immediate question is whether Congress can break the impasse before conditions deteriorate further. With 171 million passengers expected to fly this spring, the stakes are enormous. Every day without a deal adds pressure on an already strained system.
The longer-term question is whether episodes like this will finally prompt a serious conversation about the structure of airport security itself. When a political standoff can threaten to close airports and strand millions of travelers, the system has a design flaw — not just a funding problem. Until that structural issue is addressed, Americans should expect this cycle to repeat the next time Washington can't agree on a budget.